What can we expect from our new sheriff ?

This is a copy of the letter I had published in the Chronicle Independent out of Camden, SC on Jan. 12, 2011

I recently came across the following statement, “The Law in the U.S. requires three elements to be present in any crime: the Act, Intent and Damage (MENS REA – willful intent, ACTUS REUS – act or crime, CORPUS DELICTI – body of the crime, the actual damage). It is estimated that 90% of the people prosecuted by the courts in the U.S. committed no crime.” That is a very powerful statement. Basically what it is saying is that most people in prison today are there because we simply refused to accept their behavior. It has become the norm in America to pass laws to remove from among us those who we have decided are morally inferior to us. Imagine Heaven if God used the same yardstick to measure us. It would be an empty place.

But that aside, we recently have sworn in a new Sheriff in Kershaw county, and this man took an oath to defend our Constitutional rights. Question is, will he ? Does he know what our rights are ? Does he care ?

In a recent interview Sheriff Matthews said he wanted to work with Federal agents in Kershaw county. That is fine as long as they are complying with their given Constitutional duties, which are matters dealing with treason, felonies committed on the high seas and counterfeiting. These are the only three law enforcement duties given to the Federal government.

He also said he wished to increase sobriety check points. Can we all say “Papers please”. I know there are those who think this is a good thing but statistics have proven that roving patrols garner the greatest number of drunk drivers. (I would refer back to my earlier statement of moral inferiority but the concept would offend most who feel they hold the moral highground.) It is also a blatant disreguard for the 4th, 5th, 6th and 9th Amendment rights of those stopped.

I am sure there are those who feel I should be willing to give up my rights for the greater good, but I prefer to hold on to my rights and not have to fear being accosted by the kings officers. Officers, I might add, who can become judge, jury and executioner right on the spot. They only have to perceive a threat to themselves where one exists or not.

I would like to end with a quote from Richard Mack. He was the Arizona Sheriff who questioned the constitutionality of the Brady Bill, Mack v. The United States, and on June 27,1997 the Supreme Court ruled in his favor. When the question was put to him about people asking their local Sheriff for assistance when the IRS shows up to take property without due process his reply was, “He’s going to tell you to get a lawyer. And I’m telling you that is absolutely an abuse of his duty. It’s his job to protect you and now you are going to spend the next five to ten years defending something that shouldn’t be happening in the first place. And that sheriff’s going to put his boots up on his desk and go,’ Boy howdy, I sure wish we could help people like that, but we’re too busy writing tickets and catching drug dealers.’ ”